person presenting on this item? i don't think so. all right. thank you very much. supervisor campos. >> thank you madam chair. i want to first of autumn, -- all i want to make a couple points. first let me tell you that i have served on a number of committees on this board. one of my favorite committees is government and audit and oversight and one is the civil grand jury reports. i think it's a really great thing when citizens who have different background and expertise dedicate their time and provide their objective and analysis for those of us who are making policy to see. i am so grateful to every member of the civil grand jury. when you have people like mr. walker and paul chang talking about real estate

properties and agencies and agencies like the school district where he was president and marshall, can you imagine having the benefit of that kind of expertise and knowledge where you can actually hear from this person on this important issue. it's incredible. i'm very grateful. this is a complicated issue and i think that a lot of progress has been made. i do appreciate the fact that civil grand jury has consently gone back to this issue because it's one of those things that you need to consistently keep an eye on and i think we can do a better job at the city and the school district. that said, i can tell you with the school district, i started as a lawyer at the school district about 14 years ago, the district did not know how many properties it owned. it took some time to get to the point where you actually have a

basic inventory of that. and mr. golden who has been there 10 years and lasted more than any facilities directors has done an incredible job of moving the district forward in terms of maximizing the use of it's assets. i will be honest, i think it's important on how you figure out how you leverage those assets, on a general rule i do have apprehension anytime the school district talks about selling property especially to a private party. i think it's different when you are selling it to another government agencies, whether it's another institutional agencies, but because the district owns so much real estate, there has been pressure on the school to sell sefrp properties. for example the shopping center, where nordstroms is in the middle of near union square,

there was litigation because someone wanted to buy that land which is owned by the school district. i'm glad the school district did not sell it. because the assets of the school districts are assets that belong to the kids and the families and the needs to the district change. if you sell something like that, in 10-30 years you are going to regret it. i think that we are in the right direction. we are where we need to be. i do think that we can be more proactive on things and one area that i hope where more progress is made is the issue of housing. i'm grateful for the school district and mayor's office for the level of coordination that's happened. i think we need to see more of that. there is the property on 1950 mission and others, one area we've tried to make movement on and

haven't done is housing for teachers which is required in the contract for the teachers unions. we have had a lot of false starts. we need to find a way of making san francisco affordable for teachers and i hope that we do more of that. i certainly will continue to keep an eye on this issue because as much as we have come very far, i do think that we have some ways to go. i think we are headed in the right direction. i tell you if you told me 10 years ago that we would be where we are i would say you are out of your mind because we are so far behind. i think the school districts looks into them and i hope the city agencies also look into them. another example on the city end where i think it's taken so long to where we have something concrete. we have been talking

and mr. uptike notes and he's been doing a great job too but it's challenging. we have properties like serving the needs of day laborers, we have those conversations around that project when mare -- mayor lee was city administrator and here we have. we have to keep pushing as much as we have made progress. let's take public comment. no public

comment. public comment is close. >> colleagues, we need to decide on two items. we have two findings and two recommendations to decide on before us. first i would like to entertain any thoughts? supervisor campos? >> i do with respect to, i assume finding 3 is the first finding that we are looking at which is the purpose of which the surplus property ordinance was adopted are too narrow and i actually trying to find the mayor's response to -- i actually agree with what the mayor said because i think it's true that it is narrow, but there is reason for that. so i

certainly agree with that statement that the mayor's office made. >> it sounds like we are in unanimous agreement with finding for no. 3. supervisor tang? >> just moving object to finding no. 4? this one talks about current practice an allowing the city department and to keeping the property in the surplus list in definite for any consequence. i would like to make a motion to disagree in part. i recognize the school district has demonstrated need, yes while there are surplus properties out this and challenges to school entities. i wanted to disagree in part in that one. >> i agree with that

assessment. it's a partial disagreement because there are specific requirements the school has to follow under the ed code and this answer reflects that. >> all right. i think there is a unanimous agreement in that. in recommendation no. 4 we have a disagree in part. are there any comments? >> are those just findings or are we going to recommendation? recommendation, okay. >> now we are going on to recommendations. supervisor campos did you want to contribute? >> with respect to recommendation no. 3, which i think it's the board of supervisors should amend chapter 23 a to include incentives for the departments to identify and surplus property, i think the board of

supervisors should consider ways of at least amending. i'm not sure that i believe we have to amend right now, i think it's a consideration. >> maybe i would recommend that we say agree but requires further analysis to return within 6 months. >> okay. so further analyze. -- analysis. the scope to be to have an idea of how you would like to define the scope of the analysis? >> to within a six period of time to work with the city department and the department of real estate to make sure that we can -- or to examine what are some of the ideas that we have to amend the administrative code of chapter 23 a. okay. supervisor campos, how does that language sound? >> that sounds good. thank you

supervisor tang. >> okay. are there any languages changes to the resolution that either one of you want to? okay. seeing none. okay. >> recommendation no. 4. >> that's right. recommendation no. 4. is there any discussion on it? >> i don't know that -- i think i understand the point that the civil grand jury is making demand that sense i agree in part, but i also think there are limitations certainly in terms of what the school district can do because of the code and i don't want this to be interpreted to mean that properties should be on the surplus list for a period of time and after that period of

time you sell it because i think that would be a mistake. maybe. -- >> to perhaps agree because as we are saying that we don't necessarily agree we should dispose of property but very much would like to have discussions with school district officials to ensure that we can sit down and think out what are some of the strategic plans and vision for property in 10-30 years. we have an under utilized school that we get asked about a lot and i would be happy to meet with school officials on that. i would say we agree in part. >> supervisors, the options are to has been implemented has not been implemented, further analysis and will not be implemented. further analysis? okay.

>> i think it's further analysis. >> and to discuss with the city department, is that the same or prior one? >> yes. in the same time period. >> the one thing i would add because there is some confusion with school districts, when the school district is short of cash, why don't you stem sell the property and bringen money. i think it was limited with what schools can do with that money. when you do sell property, you cannot use that money for operational purnsz. -- purposes. you have to invest it back. this isn't an asset that belongs to you and me. it belongs to all of us and no the the current kids but the future generation of kids that could

benefit from it. i think the approach that is being taken is a good balance between being aggressive and caution. >> thank you very much. we have weighed in on the two findings and two recommendations. i would love to entertainment a motion. >> so moved. >> thank you very much. >> motion to continue the hearing to the call of the chairs since we have a further analysis required and motion the resolution to be forward today full board of supervisors. >> you have to accept the amendments to the resolution including your responses to the recommendation. >> thank you very much. may i have a motion to accept. >> so moved. >> let me get it out, supervisor campos. >> i get excited about real estate. >> okay the motion has been made and accepted to the recommendations in the

findings. okay. now. >> now i would like to have a motion to the call of the chair and to item no. 5 and to the board of supervisors. >> thank you very much. all right. so be it. madam clerk, is there any other business before this committee? >> no, that concludes our business for the day. >> thank you, everyone. thank you very much. meeting is adjourned. >>

good afternoon, everyone and welcome to the board of supervisors neighborhood services and safety committee. my name is david campos. we are joined by norman yee and eric mar will be excused and today we have been joined by supervisor scott wiener. i want to acknowledge the clerk of the committee, derrick evans as well as the following members of the sfgtv staff. thank you for covering this meeting. jessie larson, jenny low. >> mr. clerk, do we have any

announcements? >> please make sure to silence all cell phones and speak are cards should be submitted to the clerk. items are on the board of supervisors agenda. >> before we begin i would like to entertain a motion to excuse supervisor mar. motioned by supervisor wiener. >> please call item no. 1. item 1: agenda[hearing - fiscal and operational state of san francisco pride]1308331.sponsors: campos; wienerhearing on san francisco pride's fiscal and governance shortcomings as outlined in the 2010 memorandum from the office of the controller, steps taken to resolve said shortcomings and the current state of the san francisco pride organization. 9/3/13; received and assigned to the neighborhood services and safety committee. >> please call item no. 1. item 1: agenda[hearing - fiscal and operational state of san francisco pride]1308331.sponsors: campos; wienerhearing on san francisco pride's fiscal and governance shortcomings as outlined in the 2010 memorandum from the office of the controller, steps taken to resolve said shortcomings and the current state of the san francisco pride organization. 9/3/13; received and assigned to the neighborhood services and safety >> please call item no. 1. item 1: agenda[hearing - fiscal and operational state of san

francisco pride]1308331.sponsors: campos; wienerhearing on san francisco pride's fiscal and governance shortcomings as outlined in the 2010 memorandum from the office of the controller, steps taken to resolve said shortcomings and the current state of the san francisco pride organization. 9/3/13; received and assigned to the neighborhood services and safety committee. >> 1241234 >> great. thank you very much. i would like to thank my cosponsor, supervisor wean -- wiener. thank you for that. before this i would like to make a brief statement to give my colleagues an opportunity to say something as well. san francisco lgbt pride is something that many of us in our community care about. the fact that there are so many people in this room and wafg -- watching and had so many participating. it's one of the best known pride events in the world. last years, hundreds of thousands of people from all over the world attended and celebrated the event especially in light of the supreme court's ruling on same sex marriage on the marriage act. the mission of san francisco lesbian gay bisexual transgender committee

so commemorate the world, heritage and community and celebrate culture and liberate their people. the non-profit organization that has been running pride through its mission through a yearly parade as well as a 2-day event held here at the civic center plaza the last week in june. the city and the people of the san francisco are appreciative of the fact that this event means so much to our community and the city provides this organization in this event with a general support grant of about $60,000, as well as allowing the event to use facilities like the city owns lie city hall, civic center plaza. the city among other things shuts down market

streets and waves permitting fees for this organization. proceeds for this event are meant to be shared among san francisco non-profits that serve the lgbt community. non-profits that support the hiv community or provide breast cancer awareness services. as you maybe aware in 2010 at that time i was a relatively new member of the board of supervisors. supervisor ben do and i were approached by the lgbt community because of concerns that were raised because of the operation of this committee and this organization. in response to that, we asked the city comptroller ben rowsen field to perform an assessment of pride

as an organization and the idea behind this assessment was to understand what the challenges were that were facing that organization so that we as a city could have a better understanding of how to better assist that organization. that the controllers office viewed all of pride's book and information and successful for providing the opportunity in a very open way. that assessment found that as sf pride had both 70s -- fiscal and govern nanz, a $25,000 deficit and no assets and despite hiring a fundraiser at the time their inability to

meet those objectives. in terms of issues of governance, those included a board at the time that didn't fund raise nor saw the the organization and failed only 5 of it's 15 allowable positions at the time. the controller also found inconsistent methodology, out of date contracts and oral agreements with partners such as sponsors and beverage sellers. non-compliance with city non-profit monitoring standards were also found including things like not performing regular up to date audits and using plans and balance sheets that did not conform to accounting principles. a lot has happened

since then and a lot has been said about pride and both supervisor wiener and i thought it was important for us, given the importance of this event to revisit the implementation of the audit and assessment by the controller. we also wanted to provide a form for pride as an organization to not only give us an update on how it's doing relati -- relative to that implementation of assessment and how things are going and to provide for the opportunity for the community to have a forum for issues around the controller support or anything relating to pride as an organization could be raised. it's also a forum that allows people that have been involved in the organization including some of the vendors that have been participating for many years to share any thoughts our comments they may have about

the organization. i see this hearing as a positive development. it's an opportunity to have an honest conversation and an opportunity to give pride and also support for many of the advancements and improvement for this support. it's not a goch ka committee. it's about providing support for this hearing. my office has communicated with the director about this hearing and the fact that this hearing will be taking place. we announced that there will be a hearing a few months back before the summer and i know that communications that we tried to reach out to inform them of when this hearing would happen. if at any point there is a sense -- or a need by pride to have additional

opportunity to provide more information, we are happy to do that and to have a follow up hearing to make sure that any information, any additional formation in terms of complooints -- compliance with the report to provide that information. with that, i will turn it over to supervisor wiener. >> thank you, supervisor campos. thank you for your leadership. even from before i was on the board of supervisors around pride and making sure that this amazing and unique community institution is strong and sustain able and meeting our city's needs. i think it's important to just stress how critical pride weekend and the pride parade and festival are to san francisco culturally to the lgbt community but frankly

to the city as a whole. this parade and this festival belong to no one except for the people of san francisco. no one has more ownership of this parade than anyone else. it belongs to all of us, so when making decisions about pride, we have to be sure and back up and evaluate what is best for this parade and festival in terms of the needs of all of san francisco. i also want to acknowledge there are many people both volunteers and contractors, employees who have worked very very hard for many years to keep this parade and this festival going. although we have had some disagreements and criticisms, i really just want to acknowledge the many people who make this parade and

festival such a great success year in and year out. i remember from 2011, after i took office when there was a lot of pressing concern around the finances of the organization, being competent that whatever happens with the controversy at the time, i was still competent that the parade would still happen because there are so many dedicated contractors and employers and volunteers who make it happen. that was reassuring because he is the in incredibly important for the city. with all that said, i also think it's important to always look with a critical eye at the governance structure and pride and continually evaluate whether that structure is what makes

the most sense for the delivery of this parade and festival. over the last few years, supervisor campos and i in speaking with one voice have questions whether the current governance structure makes the most sense for the organization. i try to keep an open mind about that but i think it's an important discussion for us to have. so i hope that will be part of the conversation today and going forward. so i look forward to the hearing today and i want to thank supervisor campos for his leadership. >> thank you very much supervisor wiener. again thank you and your office for the work that you have done on this important matter as well. i think it's important that the lgbt members of this board as much as possible when it comes to issues of importance to the community that we speak with one voice. with that, let me ask our controller and we are here happy to see peg stevenson

to provide a brief overview of the assessment and the work they have done. and again, we want to thank the controller for the very expeditious way in which they responded to the request for this review. >> thank you supervisors, good afternoon. i'm peg stevenson from the controllers office. this review was done at the request at the time from supervisor campos and supervisor dealt oh, i believe. it is pretty dated, it was issued in december of 2010. there is more than 2 years worth of results between then and now. supervisor campos already summed uppermost of what i would remind anybody about the content of the report at the time. they were showing $225,000 debt and a closing balance and no operating

reserve at the time. we documentation as supervisor mentioned of their contracts. the board had not been doing fund raising or holding a finance committee to review audit results or some of the activities that you would expect from a well functioning non-profit board and they had a -- there was no director. our recommendation fell into line with those findings that they make a big investment in fund raising and recruitment of the board and result of the debt issues and get back to having an operating reserve and cash -- on hand. the city standard to that are applicable here just to remind everybody. my office coordinates a program where we monitor non-profits that typically have contracts with more than one city agency and are of a significant size.

i think it's now $200,000 more than sf city. sf pride doesn't fall into that category and just because of the size of the grant that had been received to it. we are happy to take a look at non-profits at the request of board members and use of city standards to view them. the balance sheet errors that supervisor campos refers to come from our non-profit guidelines which are on the website. the requirement that there be a coastal indication plan and a current financial audit and these are all applied to the non-profits that we have contracts with. the last thing i would say is that our work is very dated. i took a look at it in the last couple of days, the approval of the last meetings that i read in the budget rt